4/1/2012 Chris Lambright and Ray Stanford

[wwkirk]

Where's Christopher O'Brien?

 

[Burnt State]

Where's Christopher O'Brien?

Probably still busy working through real life and death tumultuous personal events.

 

[Muadib]

Probably still busy working through real life and death tumultuous personal events.

Seriously guys, out of respect for Chris and what he's going through, can we give the Stanford bashing a rest, just for a little bit while he deals with losing his brother? I'm in complete agreement that Ray's full of it, but you can't expect Chris to deal with any of this right now, its just not that important. Maybe I'm out of line with this request, and far be it from me to tell anyone what to do, but having a little compassion and letting it go for a couple weeks seems like the right thing to do, at least from my POV.

 

[mikeclr]

Agreed completely Muadib, why not give it a rest?

 

[Open-Minded-Earthling]

I'm not posting about Chris O'Brien, or his various dealings with Ray.

I'm really just focused on the claims being made by Ray or Lambright regarding this book.

I've uncovered some extreme weaknesses, imo, about the claims that were made for the basis of the book. Chris O'Brien is not the author of this book.

Here are some reasons to be critical of this book:

1) This science and research was being explored in-depth by the military, MIC, and NASA etc. in 1960's, and Ray's "beam ahead" idea was already published by a UFO researcher years before (1973 and 1976), but Ray has claimed "on air" he knew about "beam ahead" in 1977. The military knew about it long before in the 1960's and probably 1950's too.

2) Super 8mm film footage taken from the exact same camera that Ray used is shown to be very low resolution with proven youtube examples I posted and my factual analysis of resolution differences of the Super 8mm film vs 35mm, etc.

3) Dr. Myrabo is a "mad scientist" with his [not sane or plausible] "laser transport" ideas that are so outlandish and dangerous that these ideas will never be developed on Earth. No one in their "right mind" should want a vast network of laser weapons on Earth or to weaponize space with lasers too. Imo.

4) I learned that Lambright and James Fox have only been allowed to see "cherry picked" Still Images of the Super 8mm film from the 1985 film footage. I am highly critical of anyone doing this sort of "information control" that can be highly fraudulent and abusive to "the truth", etc. I have the photography background to know something about the very poor resolution that Super 8mm film captures beyond a half-mile distance even with 10x power lens. Beyond a mile there just is NOT the resolution necessary for seeing any details of an object. It's like being "out of focus" with no way "to correct" to resolve any detail.

Taking Super 8mm film of objects beyond a mile away as Ray was/is doing in this 1985 film is absolutely preposterous to rely on it for proof of anything that Ray is claiming. These objects were probably several miles away.

I call it as I see it: BS. [BigStories]

This thread or my posts here really have nothing to do with Chris O'Brien.

We should have a right to voice our opinions even if we're mistaken. Based on all that I'm learning about Ray I believe he may really be a paid undercover or free disinformation agent that knowingly or unknowingly helped the MIC and/or military to blow smoke in your face. I'll explain that thinking later on, but that is an opinion subject to debate. It's not a fact.

 

[Constance]

OME, McCampbell's, Hill's, and others ability to reason about how witnessed ufos apparently manipulate physics as we understood/understand it does not mean that our science and technology in the 1970s or even today could implement the same manipulations of airborne physical objects witnessed in many thousands of ufo cases. This page offers many more links to research you could pursue in reaching an understanding of the difference between physical manipulations that can be recognized to occur in ufo phenomena and the actual achievement of such manipulations by our species.

http://www.hyper.net/ufo/physics.html

 

[Muadib]

I'm not posting about Chris O'Brien, or his various dealings with Ray.

This thread or my posts here really have nothing to do with Chris O'Brien.

Even if Chris isn't your intended target, he's very close to Ray, and he tends to take this Ray stuff personally. Clearly others are expecting him to respond, as wwkirk's post above shows. All I'm saying is, consider how your posts are going to affect him during this already difficult time.

Like I said, I agree that Ray is full of BS, but ffs man, you've reposted the same ideas with different wording in multiple threads. We get it, but the continuous harping on the same thing over and over again is unnecessary, imo. You've made your point.

Honestly, aside from a very small fraction of posters, most of us agree that something is rotten when it comes to Ray, Torme's recent DMR interview just reinforces that fact.

Chris shouldn't have to worry about defending Ray on top of everything else. Whether you intend it or not, the result is more stress for Chris at a time when that's the last thing he needs. Your points about Ray will be just as valid a few weeks from now when Chris has had some time to grieve.

I'm just making a suggestion, do with it what you will, but be aware of the effect that your posts may have on others.

 

[Open-Minded-Earthling]

I should insert this about the distance to these objects that were filmed by Ray. He said quoting from Chris O'Brien's unpublished book: "They both pointed to the same place in the sky, about 50 degrees above the northeastern horizon at what I subsequently judged to be about the 5,000-foot level. About a mile high there was a strange object coming across."

We don't know the distance away "horizontally", but the altitude appears to be about 5,000 feet up, which is about one mile in altitude. If these were 50 degrees up from the horizon when first sighted, then these are probably miles away. At the closest distance these objects were 1-2 miles away nearing overhead, so these objects are not going to have much detail at that distance judging by the film quality seen on youtube and its low resolution quality of the micro film size itself.

The objects then went upward, so these were never closer than 1-2 miles away.

 

[Constance]

Honestly, aside from a very small fraction of posters, most of us agree that something is rotten when it comes to Ray, Torme's recent DMR interview just reinforces that fact.

Muadib, I second your suggestion that these attacks on Ray Stanford should be suspended until Chris O'Brien returns to the forum ready to respond to them. Based on my own experience with the sudden, unexpected, loss of someone deeply loved I think we should be prepared to give him some time to recover from his shock and grief.

Re your statement highlighted in blue above, I argue that no matter how many people "agree that something is rotten when it comes to Ray," those opinions are based not on what Stanford knows and surmises and has to offer in evidence for what he claims but on the way individuals (frustrated and curious individuals) feel about Stanford's holding back his own disclosures. That Tracy Torme reported a recent frustrating and even unpleasant telephone conversation with Ray Stanford is evidence of Torme's own 'feelings' during and after the conversation and his frustration, like ours, that we have to wait until Stanford is ready to make his evidence available to us. We 'feel' that Stanford's decision to withhold that evidence, and his crankiness, is 'rotten'. That does not persuade me (and another group of frustrated, but more patient, individuals) that Stanford has nothing to offer. The fact is that we don't know what he has to offer and there are undoubtedly complex reasons for that, and bitching and moaning about his resistance to disclosing it simply falls under the category of 'tuff shit', which we are or should be accustomed to by now given the vast, well-financed, and powerful organizations [governmental, military, and private] that we know have been withholding the information we want for 65 years. Only infiltration of the MIC by one of us is going to crack open what is known by the PTB.

I'd say a lot of people are currently displacing their reasonable outrage at the PTB on to Ray Stanford, who might well have reasons we are not aware of for waiting with his disclosures. @Open-Minded Earthling jumps to the conclusion in some of his recent rants that it must be the case that Stanford is a disinformation agent for the MIC. Judging from the basis of Stanford's lifelong investigation of ufo phenomena, and to estimates of his character and work by people like @Christopher O'Brien, I would say that notion makes no sense whatever and is exceedingly presumptuous. The bottom line is that we are going to have to wait to see what evidence Stanford has accumulated concerning ufos. In the meantime, these diatribes against Stanford are pointless, a waste of time, and needlessly offensive to Stanford and to those who have spoken on his behalf, includling Chris O'Brien and @Christian Lambright. I recommend to all who are stewing about Stanford that they read, and read carefully, Lambright's excellent book X-Descending, which is readily available to read on Kindle and on a free Kindle app from amazon.com.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I agree that maybe this should cool down. Chris has enough on his head to deal with right now. Give it time.

Besides what needs to be said has been mostly said already. But I won't shut this down. I just want to give it some space.

 

[Open-Minded-Earthling]

@Open-Minded Earthling jumps to the conclusion in some of his recent rants that it must be the case that Stanford is a disinformation agent for the MIC.

I'm not ranting, imo. I offer evidence for my points of view.

I've made it very clear that I'm formulating my ideas about that... whether Stanford might have been a knowing or unknowing disinformation agent for some "special interest" group(s). It could be UFO agendas from a number of possible sources that includes the MIC, military, counter intelligence, or some other UFO special interest groups that are unknown.

I definitely believe Ray Stanford was identified and targeted by various disinformation PTB. I am convinced that is a fact, but I have no way to prove it.

I won't post in this thread until next Saturday, but I do have more to say about this subject. I find Ray Stanford to be a fascinating subject to study; he is at the center of the storm of UFO mythology beginning at 9 years old in 1947. He is someone with an unrelenting attention span and extreme obsessive focus on UFO details and in recalling these UFO encounters in his audio interviews. I've said Ray has a high IQ, imo, but that does not mean he is also not a flawed person with blind spots too. No one is perfect, right?

I'm taking a break until next Saturday... from this thread. But, if Chris O'Brien posts to this thread before next Saturday, then I think that opens the thread to debate again.

Until then, peace out...

 

[Muadib]

Muadib, I second your suggestion that these attacks on Ray Stanford should be suspended until Chris O'Brien returns to the forum ready to respond to them. Based on my own experience with the sudden, unexpected, loss of someone deeply loved I think we should be prepared to give him some time to recover from his shock and grief.

Re your statement highlighted in blue above, I argue that no matter how many people "agree that something is rotten when it comes to Ray," those opinions are based not on what Stanford knows and surmises and has to offer in evidence for what he claims but on the way individuals (frustrated and curious individuals) feel about Stanford's holding back his own disclosures. That Tracy Torme reported a recent frustrating and even unpleasant telephone conversation with Ray Stanford is evidence of Torme's own 'feelings' during and after the conversation and his frustration, like ours, that we have to wait until Stanford is ready to make his evidence available to us. We 'feel' that Stanford's decision to withhold that evidence, and his crankiness, is 'rotten'. That does not persuade me (and another group of frustrated, but more patient, individuals) that Stanford has nothing to offer. The fact is that we don't know what he has to offer and there are undoubtedly complex reasons for that, and bitching and moaning about his resistance to disclosing it simply falls under the category of 'tuff shit', which we are or should be accustomed to by now given the vast, well-financed, and powerful organizations [governmental, military, and private] that we know have been withholding the information we want for 65 years. Only infiltration of the MIC by one of us is going to crack open what is known by the PTB.

I'd say a lot of people are currently displacing their reasonable outrage at the PTB on to Ray Stanford, who might well have reasons we are not aware of for waiting with his disclosures. @Open-Minded Earthling jumps to the conclusion in some of his recent rants that it must be the case that Stanford is a disinformation agent for the MIC. Judging from the basis of Stanford's lifelong investigation of ufo phenomena, and to estimates of his character and work by people like @Christopher O'Brien, I would say that notion makes no sense whatever and is exceedingly presumptuous. The bottom line is that we are going to have to wait to see what evidence Stanford has accumulated concerning ufos. In the meantime, these diatribes against Stanford are pointless, a waste of time, and needlessly offensive to Stanford and to those who have spoken on his behalf, includling Chris O'Brien and @Christian Lambright. I recommend to all who are stewing about Stanford that they read, and read carefully, Lambright's excellent book X-Descending, which is readily available to read on Kindle and on a free Kindle app from amazon.com.

Constance,

I feel like if I engage with you on this, I'll be doing the same thing I asked OME not to do, and that would be a tad hypocritical of me. I'll just say that I disagree with your assertion that everyone expressing skepticism or frustration with the way Ray does things is simply "bitching and moaning," impatient, or projecting their anger for the "PTB" (whoever that ominous acronym refers to...) onto Ray Stanford. There's a lot of things I want to say here, but out of respect for Chris I'm going to abstain for the time being. I'd like to revisit this in the future, but I make no guarantees.

Thanks to everyone for being understanding about Chris's situation and leaving this be for awhile. I know that if I was going through what he's going through, I probably wouldn't much feel like visiting a forum where I knew I was going to be getting into heated debates about a close friend, and we definitely want Chris to come back, so lets give it some time. I'm sure he'll be back to his old self, telling all of us Stanford skeptics to go screw soon enough.

 

[Burnt State]

Constance,

I feel like if I engage with you on this, I'll be doing the same thing I asked OME not to do, and that would be a tad hypocritical of me. I'll just say that I disagree with your assertion that everyone expressing skepticism or frustration with the way Ray does things is simply "bitching and moaning," impatient, or projecting their anger for the "PTB" (whoever that ominous acronym refers to...) onto Ray Stanford. There's a lot of things I want to say here, but out of respect for Chris I'm going to abstain for the time being. I'd like to revisit this in the future, but I make no guarantees.

Thanks to everyone for being understanding about Chris's situation and leaving this be for awhile. I know that if I was going through what he's going through, I probably wouldn't much feel like visiting a forum where I knew I was going to be getting into heated debates about a close friend, and we definitely want Chris to come back, so lets give it some time. I'm sure he'll be back to his old self, telling all of us Stanford skeptics to go screw soon enough.

It says a lot when a former fierce critic makes such statements and is a testament to the idea of character. I hope this degree of conscientiousness carries forward into the future. All the attitude and ideas of "beating the last point" gets boring, and has all been said before anyway.